Wednesday, October 11, 2006

Is the tide turning?

In future, I am clear that our strategy of funding and engagement must shift significantly towards those organisations that are taking a proactive leadership role in tackling extremism and defending our shared values.

Two weeks ago, Twin Cities airport officials were firming up plans to allow many Muslim taxi drivers — staunchly opposed to transporting passengers carrying alcohol of any sort — to alert potential fares of their beliefs with a different-colored light atop their cabs.

After a barrage of negative feedback, they've decided to scrap the idea.

"Since then, we've heard from Australia and England. It's really touched a nerve among a lot of people. The backlash, frankly, has been overwhelming," said Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport spokesman Patrick Hogan. "People are overwhelmingly against any kind of cultural accommodation."

9 Comments:

Concerning these taxi drivers with "staunch" views, would it seem as reasonable for a bus driver with strong prejudices against alcohol to select his passengers on this basis? And, as far as I recall, the prohibition concerning alcohol in islam applies to the consuming of it (and probably in intoxicating quantities) not to the transporting it.

Why, in any case, should the views of muslim taxi drivers have more importance than those with other strong beliefs? I, for one, abhor hallal meat and would never consume it, but I doubt that if I worked as a taxi driver and refused to carry a passenger from a hallal butcher, my principles would be treated with the same sensitivity.

Agree,Rexie. If they don't want to ferry people carrying alcohol, they are not qualified to be a cab driver in the West and should look for other employment.

Ruth Kelly says she is only going to give taxpayer money to organisations "defending our shared values." I have news for Ms Kelly: there aren't any. We believe in liberty, democracy, individual choice. They don't.

She needs to be a lot more direct than that if she wants to get my attention.

Agree Verity...we're getting a few MPs taking a bit of a stand lately...probably because they, at last, are hearing the mood of the country..but I have yet to be convinced that it's no more than throwing a few concessions our way to keep us quiet.

anonymous 8:54 - I think they're genuinely frit by the consequences of what they've done. They thought inviting radical, aggressive terrorists and terrorist-enablers into Downing St was like inviting the school bully into the Head's office for tea and biscuits and a cosy little chat. Civilise the little blighter.

Now there is a sense in the air of not knowing what to do. I would like to proffer a modest suggestion: READ A BOOK ABOUT ISLAM, YOU MORONS. Read as much of the koran as you can stomach. Read some of the hadiths. Then come back and tell me why you thought giving these violent, ignorant people advantages over indigenous Brits and well-integrated/well-accepted immigrant groups was a good idea.

Didn't it occur to any of you smug, ignorant know-it-alls in the Cabinet to inform yourselves before loosing off your mouths? Even now, Ruth Kelly seems to think that islam is akin to being another branch of Christianity, sort of like the Latter Day Saints, for example, or the Amish. A bit weird, but we all worship the same god - simper, simpler.